Summary
The Supreme Court of Connecticut held that the statutory exceptions in General Statutes § 53-206(b)(3)(D) and (E) apply only to knives with blades four inches or longer, not to switchblade knives. Because Andre Campbell was carrying a switchblade, he was not entitled to a jury instruction concerning an implicit residence or place-of-abode exception, even if a dormitory hallway could qualify as part of his abode. The court affirmed the Appellate Court's judgment upholding his conviction for carrying a dangerous weapon.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether General Statutes § 53-206(b)(3)(D) and (E) create an implicit residence-or-place-of-abode exception for carrying weapons other than a knife with an edged blade four inches or more in length.
- Whether the defendant was entitled to a jury instruction concerning whether the common hallway of his dormitory constituted part of his residence or place of abode.
- Whether the statute was unconstitutional as applied to persons carrying dangerous weapons in their residence or place of abode.
Holdings
- General Statutes § 53-206(b)(3)(D) and (E) plainly and unambiguously apply only to the carrying of a knife whose edged blade is four inches or more in length; they do not create an exception for carrying a switchblade or other dangerous weapon in a residence or place of abode.
- A statutory exception permitting an individual to carry a specific dangerous weapon for a specific purpose implicitly permits incidental transportation or movement necessary to carry out that permitted purpose, but it does not create a general exception for carrying all dangerous weapons in the home.
- The Supreme Court declined to review the defendant's claim that § 53-206 was unconstitutional as applied to persons carrying dangerous weapons in their residence or place of abode because the claim was not preserved at trial and the defendant did not seek review under State v. Golding.
Key quotations
“We conclude that the exceptions set forth in subparagraphs (D) and (E) of § 53-206(b)(3) plainly and unambiguously apply only to the carrying of long knives.” (at 665)
“Accordingly, although we reaffirm our holding in State v. Sealy, supra, 208 Conn. at 693, 546 A.2d 271, that the language of what is now § 53-206(b)(3)(D) and (E) implicitly provides an exception for carrying a long knife in one's residence or abode, the defendant would not be entitled to a jury instruction under the statute even if the common hallway of the dormitory constituted his abode because he was carrying a switchblade knife, which is prohibited irrespective of location.” (at 665-66)
Factual background
Campbell, a University of Bridgeport freshman living in a dormitory, regularly carried a switchblade knife. During a confrontation in a common dormitory hallway, he drew the knife and stabbed another student four times. The jury acquitted him of first-degree assault and lesser-included offenses but convicted him of carrying a dangerous weapon under General Statutes § 53-206(a).
Procedural history
Campbell was convicted in the trial court of carrying a dangerous weapon, namely a switchblade knife, and acquitted of assault-related charges. The Appellate Court affirmed, relying on State v. Sealy to conclude that the dormitory hallway was not the defendant's place of abode for purposes of the statute. The Supreme Court affirmed on an alternate statutory ground, holding that the relevant exceptions apply only to long knives and therefore could not aid Campbell, who carried a switchblade.